The VRM and other power delivery circuits on overclocking boards are also typically engineered to handle much higher voltages than spec.
Avoid the first revision though, which is probably good advice for any device.
As a consequence, you probably want to disable the BIOS option before booting any Windows installation (in my case, it was called "Q-installer", but it is different for gaming boards in my understanding). Until you disable it, it will reinstall and re-enable itself at boot.
In my case, I noticed it thanks to Windows Server pointing out which service was slowing down shutdown, which was "AsusUpdateCheck". Increased the shutdown time by a few seconds.
I did not find any info about how to make Windows ignore the WPBT table.
EDIT - had the date wrong, it was mid-2016.
My desktop is still running smoothly on its Asus mobo from 2014 (I believe it was the Z97-P but I'm not home at the moment to double check). No fancy RGB LEDs, but I haven't shopped for one in a while so that may be harder to accomplish now. Not sure.
Either way, they've always been competitively priced and well supported. Used them to build both gaming and general use machines for friends/family over the past several years without issue.
ASUS as a good "home" option
In reality I would suggest investing in HP Z series workstations or Z series small formfactor machines. They rock!
You should have a better experience today. Though, I would wait 2-3 months after a product (mb/cpu) launch before getting one in general. Just so BIOS updates can shake out a bit and software support (Windows/Linux) can as well.
I wish they'd come with a TPM. The integration issues are frequently around the TPM and getting it recognized. It's required for BitLocker whole disk encryption which is part of our standard build. (If a machine or drive goes AWOL, we don't have to worry.)
Edit: Power supply quality helps a lot, too, as others have said. I can't remember the brand of power supplies we used, but that definitely mattered.
Power supply issues have bitten me in the past probably more than anything else in terms of issues.
Bad PSUs are probably a bigger factor.
can I notice the difference outside of benchmarks? probably not, but the performance increase per core is comparable to stepping up to a stock 9700k from a 9600k (ignoring core count). if you would pay $100 to have a 9700k instead of a 9600k (which I did), why not overclock it too? it took me about 20 minutes of actual work and 12 hours of waiting for stress tests to fail.
I hear the i9-9900k is a good overclocker but with AMD being the best option now and their chips being well, let's be honest, not the best overclockers in the world I don't really see the point.
Never had stability problems though.
The author fails to understand some things:
Not so for the owners of Intel boards. To show just much Intel values its customers, they were informed that BIOS updates were not forthcoming and the newer, faster processors were not supported on Intel boards. That was no doubt particularly galling to the owners of the DZ87KLT boards, which sold for around $300 when new and are worth $150 or more even today (2019).
After all the hoopla in 2018 about Meltdown and Spectre, guess what happened: Intel somehow magically managed to update the BIOS for those boards after akl. For the DZ87KLT-75K, nothing really changed because the ME firmware did not get updated. But for the DQ87PG board, the 2018 BIOS updates did update the ME firmware as well.
It's precisely because Intel "values its customers," or more precisely because Intel understands its value add for customers versus the other motherboard manufacturers, that they would not just slide support for a few extra CPUs into the firmware. To do the job to their own standards they would need to fully retest everything with those new CPUs before officially supporting them. The economics of the Meltdown and Spectre fixes is an entirely separate matter.
(it'd be fair to point out that home power users who want to upgrade the CPU on a motherboard after purchase were never a large proportion of the Intel motherboard buying public and, in recent years... there cannot be that many)
Their main business customers aren't interested in mixing and matching pieces of already purchased computers. Just like they don't particularly care that the whole house of cards is theoretically subservient to some inauditable backdoor.
Intel makes processors. The will sell things like motherboards, Compute Sticks, and NUCs just to push their primary line. Even their Flash, Intel doesn't want to be a Flash Fab, but it helps their processor line in many ways to have a presence.
It's like the Microsoft Surface. Microsoft will drop support for it in a hot minute when they feel the Surface has succeeded or failed. They already did it once with the Surface RT, but maybe I'm wrong and Microsoft is pivoting with the Surface to be more Apple-like... lol
I can see that it's not entirely true either, Socket 1151 supports both Skylake and Kaby Lake: http://asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z390%20Phantom%20Gaming%20X/index...
What change did actually take place?
Anecdotal, but it also seems to line up with most of what I hear out there.
Maybe the reason Intel quit making boards is because there are lots of good motherboards now?
Getting the "basement bargain" board for $20... well, you get what you pay for.
But for each of those top brands, Gigabyte, ASUS, and MSI, buying their top tier products gets you a seriously good board.
The gaming boards tend to have a lot of features a workstation user might not need, like great overclocking support, etc... but with that quality comes stability. Worth every penny to get a good motherboard when doing a build.
That... and I no longer get cheap cases either... but that's another story. The moral? Don't skimp on your components, and you'll wind up with a much better system that lasts you for years.
Things like ports for routing cables without causing a rat's nest... cheap stamped sheet metal with sharp edges to cut yourself on, decent I/O backplate, temperature control zones, bottom mounted PSU, etc. A good quality case will cost you... but you can likely get several builds out of it over the years... so well worth it.
Eventually I moved the processor to an Intel board (so yes, this is some years back, probably just before they stopped making them), and had no instability. The Asus motherboard was somehow incompatible with the processor, I guess.
So I didn't go with Asus last time I bought a motherboard, although I wouldn't be surprised if they're otherwise fine.